| « MLK Day: An oasis of peace in a desert of conflict? | Best be careful what you are saying - some Loonie may be listening! (UPDATED) » |
TC: What Were They THINKING?!?
You know, since the Lycheegate episode at the beginning of the season, I have sort of lost my appetite for this show. Oh, sure, I still watch it, but I don't feel the need to stay up late and watch it when it first airs: I am satisfied with the reruns. And, to be honest, Top Chef has been more about the Reality TV Drama then about the food. Whether it is Cliff vs. Mia, or pretty much anybody vs. Marcel, this could easily be The Real World in a kitchen.
Well, the episode this week made me so incredibly pissed off that I simply had to write about it. And what, do you ask, would cause me to rise up like this?
I can sum it up in two words: RAW CHICKEN
Yes... one of this group of 'experienced' cooks committed what, in my book, is the Unpardonable Sin of chefdom: they sent out RAW CHICKEN to the customers!
When my wife first told me she heard this, I couldn't believe it. So, I listened carefully, and sure 'nuf it was mentioned on the show - both during the dining, and again at Judges Table. It was supposed to be an appetizer, created by Marcel (who admitted he was the one who cooked it when questioned.) Certainly, I thought, this is Marcel's time to go - he is, as Betty once said, 'outta here'. Then, to my horror, they picked Michael for elimination! WTF?!?
It turns out that Marcel 'redeemed himself' with a subsequent dish (fried veggies, considered by the judges to be one of the evening's best), while Michael's level of contribution wasn't deemed appropriate for a 'Top Chef'.
Gail Simmons had this to say:
The food was basically edible, save for one chicken wing and some watermelon soaked in cream and blue cheese,
Later on, she goes on to explain that
...we eliminated Miguel as we realized that, although he had some skill and an engaging personality, he was being carried by his team mates and not taking any initiative. He was a good line cook, but not yet a chef.
Tom Colicchio had the following explanation:
I could go on and on about the disappointments -- the uncooked barbecue chicken wing, the dispiritingly meatloaf-esque burger, the misguided and distasteful watermelon and cheese gnocchi...
Now, here's what I don't get: while I will admit that Michael seems more like a cook and not a chef (much less a Top one), at least he didn't try to kill his customers by feeding them RAW CHICKEN! And folks, I am not kidding here. There is a reason that kitchen protocol is so picky when it comes to handling uncooked chicken: the nasty little critters that inhabit that carcass can kill someone - and people with compromised immune systems are particularly at risk.
OK, so maybe it was just under-cooked, instead of uncooked. However, that does not excuse an act for which the Health Dept would most likely close the joint. I just can't see any of these judges, if faced with the same situation in their own establishments, letting Marcel stay while sending Michael packing. I would certainly be interested in hearing what Tim Ted Allen's thinking on this is.
At least they know how to properly punish the guilty over in Hell's Kitchen.
Trackback address for this post
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
1 trackback
Top Chef
January 17, 2007
You may notice the similarity between the title for this week's posting and the one from last week. This week, though, it isn't the judges whose (seeming) mental lapses I am calling into question: it is the contestants the...